School Evaluation Services Presentation to NGA November 4, 2001

1. School Evaluation ServicesPresentation toNGANovember 4, 2001

2. What Is School Evaluation Services? Management and communication tool for administrators, policymakers, parents and other stakeholders • Dynamic public website displays district reports, key data trends, and comparisons for each district and/or school • Annual independent S&P written analysis of strengths and challenges • Annual Statewide Insights report focused on state trends, data quality, and progress

3. “Because SES doesn't rely on rankings or ratings and instead provides a rich new data resource, we have an unprecedented opportunity to assist the 34 districts in our region.” • Superintendent Marlene Davis • Wayne RESA • Capital Journal, May 25, 2001

4. Student Results Spending Return on Resources Learning Environment Financial Environment Demographic Environment What are the academic results? Where is the money spent? What is the comparative return? What is the scholastic context? What is the financial context? What is the socioeconomic context? How Is Information Organized?Hundreds of Data Items

5. “This is helping to clarify the unique challenges faced by urban school districts.” - CEO Kenneth Burnley Detroit Public Schools Detroit Free Press, May 25, 2001 “It's the most comprehensive evaluation of schools that I've seen.” - Superintendent Craig Misner Kalamazoo RESA Kalamazoo Gazette, May 24, 2001

6. Not only data, but written analysis “Return on Resources”—simultaneous examination of spending, results, and context Each district compared to four benchmarks: state, regional, and socioeconomic peer averages; and district over time Multi-year trends measure progress Website allows users to customize comparison groups Unique Analytical Frameworkwww.ses.standardandpoors.com

7. “The real power of this report will be to allow school districts to compare themselves to other similar school districts and look for exceptions. That would be very helpful to discover if there are deficiencies.” - Superintendent David Dresslar Jenison School District The Grand Rapids Press, May 25, 2001

8. Statewide Insights Michigan Findings • MEAP data analysis reveals success and challenges in educational achievement but also raises questions about state’s accountability program. • Overall pass rates are low • Not a “value added” system • Snapshot versus continuum • Timing is problematic

9. Statewide Insights Michigan Findings • Significant Achievement Gaps exist across the state, in school districts and in school buildings • Many of these gaps are more pervasive than places that research says should “be expected” • Gaps in achievement may be significantly understated

10. Statewide Insights Michigan Findings Many schools and districts are “beating the odds”

11. Statewide Insights Michigan Findings • Major indicators of student achievement are misaligned • Graduation and dropout rates are problematic due to measurement methodology • 57% MEAP HS pass rate versus 81% graduation rate • e.g. 29,000 HS graduates did not pass the reading test • MEAP vs. NAEP 4th grade

12. Statewide Insights Michigan Findings • When looking at MEAP and other student results indicators, how money is spent and the context in which it is spent is at least as important as the “amount” of money spent. • Through examination of numerous “return indicators” (PCIs), it appears that increased spending alone is not likely to accomplish the goal of having all students meet state standards. The return on resources must be improved.

13. What Do the Data Tell Us? • No silver bullets • Need to align policy making with data analysis • Without improved “return”, goals of improvement of student achievement overall and of closing achievement gaps are probably unaffordable • Districts and schools that are “beating the odds” are potential sources of best practice • State’s accountability system needs to improve

14. What Influence Can the Data Have? • Increased parent involvement • Increased communication between schools and community • Enhanced ability to identify needs in districts • Greater accuracy of data collection and reporting • More complete examination of prior assumptions about accreditation and resource allocation at the state level

15. Perceived political biases interfere with or “limit” analysis Economies of scale— no state alone would be willing to expend amount necessary to have a comprehensive system Technological Advantages—sophisticated technology tools and content are constantly and rapidly being improved without requests for unplanned appropriations Standard Analytical Framework—will allow comparisons between states and across state lines for individual districts - Michigan and Pennsylvania are the first states to lead the nation by participating in a new standard Why States Need a Third Party?

16. SES based on more than 5 years of research & development Reputation for objectivity and analytical rigor Vast experience in public sector analysis Global provider of analytical benchmarks Experienced staff and advisors, including educators and administrators Why Standard & Poor’s?

17. “Standard & Poor's School Evaluation Services is an excellent example of providing parents and taxpayers with a more complete picture of their school's performance…The S&P system has overwhelming support…” - Bob Chase, President National Education Association Letter to the Editor, Wall Street Journal, July 31, 2001

18. SES National Board of Advisors • Former Governor Jim Hunt, Chair of SES Advisory Board • Christopher Cross, President and CEO of the Council for Basic Education • Dr. Susan Fuhrman, Dean of the Graduate School of Education at the University of Pennsylvania • Dr. Jim Kelly, Former President and CEO of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards • Dr. Ted Sanders, President of the Education Commission of the States

19. “When you involve people in the process, you lessen resistance and maximize benefit. All of us should learn from their efforts.” -Tom Watkins Michigan Superintendent of Public Instruction Michigan Department of Education News Release, May 23, 2001

20. Understanding and Applying the Data • In many districts and states, there are not sufficient resources and staff to conduct thorough analysis and benchmarking, SES fills that void • Helps districts and policymakers avoid being “data rich but information poor” • Helps end policymakers’ reliance on anecdotal generalizations

21. What Influence Does the Data Have? • Increased parent involvement • Increased communication between schools and community • Increased ability to identify needs in districts • More accurate data collection and reporting • More complete examination of prior assumptions about accreditation and resource allocation at the state level

22. “For parents it’s a godsend…relevant data about how schools are performing…For the first time a nonpartisan company with considerable analytical skills and no connection to the education establishment has undertaken an objective analysis of school systems.” -Pete duPont Former Governor of Delaware Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal, October 17, 2001

23. “SES is beginning to change the balance of power in America’s public-school systems, among our most insular bureaucratic structures. SES information will change the way parents perceive their schools, and that will change the way schools work, and then one day, that will change the way the world works.” -Pete duPont Former Governor of Delaware Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal, October 17, 2001

24. How Does SES Assist with ESEA? • Increased accountability through transparency • Increased disclosure of disaggregated data • Measures of annual progress and longer term trend analyses • Measures to understand and therefore help maximize return on federal and state dollars • Ability to rapidly adapt and include multiple measures of performance

25. How Will Comparability Be Achieved? • Use NAEP as a benchmark for state test comparisons • Other student results measures such as SAT, ACT and AP scores and participation rates • Basic financial data are comparable across most states and therefore, so too are braod measures of “return”

26. "I've already heard from several superintendents who shared with me their plans to review the reports, to confer with their colleagues from districts with similar characteristics and challenges, and to identify best practices that may be replicated in their own districts. I'm happy the service is turning out to be so helpful to local educators." -Mike Flanagan, Executive Director Michigan Association of School Administrators Capital Journal, May 25, 2001

27. Where To Find SES • SES website URL: www.ses.standardandpoors.com • SES e-mail address: SES@standardandpoors.com

28. “It’s good to have them [Standard & Poor’s] doing it. I’m very excited about it. I regret that I won’t be in a position to do something about these conclusions over the next 15 months, over the next couple of years, but I think Pennsylvania ought to take them to heart.” -Tom Ridge Former Governor of Pennsylvania The Harrisburg Patriot News, October 5, 2001

30. Michigan Elementary Schools MEAPPassi n g (%) Economically Disadvantaged Students (%)

31. Michigan K-12 Districts M EAP Pa s s i n g (%) Operating Spending Per Student ($)

32. BEATING THE ODDS 3 YEARS RUNNING

33. SES Michigan Advisory Group • Mike Addonizzio, Associate Professor, College of Education, Wayne State University • Chuck Anderson, Executive Director of the Michigan Education Association • Madhu Anderson, Director of the Center Education Performance and Information • Mike Flanagan, Executive Director of the Michigan Association of School Administrators • Justin King, Executive Director of the Michigan Association of School Boards

34. SES Michigan Advisory Group (cont.) • Doug Roberts, State Treasurer, Michigan Department of Treasury • Dan Quisenberry, President of the Michigan Association of Public School Academies • Jim Sandy, Director for the Michigan Business Leaders for Education Excellence • Ray Telman, Executive Director of the Middle Cities Education Association • Tom Watkins, Superintendent of Public Instruction for the Michigan Department of Education • Tom White, Executive Director of the Michigan School Business Officials

35. SES Complements Existing State Accountability Programs • Michigan and Pennsylvania have extensive school information systems and have supplemented them with SES • SES assembles data from fragmented sources into a single database • SES enhances state report cards by providing additional data, trends, benchmarks and comparisons.